754 REPORT — 1888. 



because it is unwise enough to believe in protection ? Again, what is there unfair 

 in that ? Is it unfair to sell to us and not buy ? Why ? There is no deception. We 

 will not buy of you ; we do not compel you to sell to us. If you do, it is because it 

 suits you. But let us drop the words and look at the substance. If, by not buying 

 of the foreigner, we could make him buy of us, there might be some reason in our 

 refusal to buy. When a case of that sort is shown it will be worth considering. 

 Till then, if we buy of those who will not buy of us, it is because it suits us, as 

 they say. Why ? Because we get the thing we want when otherwise we should go 

 without or get it dearer. Remember, we must pay for it ; and to pay for it we 

 must produce something else, which it is worth our while to make, and change for 

 it — I do not mean change specifically. We deal with the world. From parts we 

 get gold and silver. With them, with goods, with what is owing to us, we pay 

 those who do and those who do not buy of us. A friend said : ' Dear me, our im- 

 ports are 350,000,000/., our exports only 230,000,000/.,' or whatever was the figure. 

 I said, ' I wish we could get them for less.' Is protection to be argued over again ? 

 There is not a reason that can be given for it that would not be equally good for 

 protecting tariffs between London and Southwark. 



There is one more particular subject I wish to speak on. It is certain that 

 the wonderful labour-saving inventions of modern times have diminished the 

 manual labour required by society. If the food, clothing, and habitations of 

 mankind are got and constructed with less labour, fewer labourers are required. 

 Of course, I know the well-recognised truth that man's wants and wishes are never 

 more than supplied. But everything in this world is relative, and, though every 

 one might like more than he has, yet his wants diminish as his havings increase. 

 HappUy, one good result of this saving of labour has been a diminution of the 

 hours of work, an increase of leisure, one of the good things desired by mankind. 

 But there is always a risk that, if work does not increase and workmen do, the 

 competition among them will diminish their rewards. Another thing to be re- 

 membered is that our mineral wealth — certainly our coal — is diminishing. Further, 

 that foreign competition increases ; we have taught others how to rival us. I do not 

 prophesy our decadence ; I have the greatest confidence in my countrymen. But 

 I do think there are considerations wliich should make us rejoice if our population 

 did not increase as fast as it has done. I am glad to think that the rate of increase 

 in the last few years has not been as great as it was formerly. No doubt a great 

 increase of population is in one sense a cause of rejoicing. It shows a prosperous 

 condition of things, and adds to the strength of the State. But it inevitably tends 

 to a lowering of wages and a lowering of the standard of comfort in the labouring 

 classes. It may be, and in this country has been, counteracted by other circum- 

 stances, but there is that tendency. I never sympathise with the exultation at 

 our increase in population compared with the French. I think it veiy doubtful 

 if they do not show more foresight and thrift than do our people. It is sad to see 

 the improvident marriages of boys and girls without a shilling, or a chair or table. 

 Of course, it is a charming thing for a man after his work to go to his home, find 

 his comfort has been cared for by an aflfectionate wife, and have his children to 

 play with, and I believe that such a man is more likely to keep out of mischief and 

 out of the public-house ; the attraction there is less, and he feels his responsibility 

 for those dear to him. But the home should be a comfortable one for him, and 

 this it will not be in the case of the improvident marriages I mention. I do 

 sincerely think that they are earnestly to be deprecated, especially at the present 

 time, and I am glad to think they are diminishing. 



I will not trouble you further. I daresay there are many among you who do 

 not share my love for Political Economy. I have endeavoured not to weary you, 

 but to place before you some leading principles and considerations. I believe and 

 repeat that correct opinions on the subject are most important, and that the 

 acquisition of them is neither difficult nor repulsive. 



